Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Report: "Breitbart Obtains Email Showing McGinniss, Random House Likely Published Literary Hoax"
Big Government ^ | 9/22/11 | Andrew Breitbart

Posted on 09/22/2011 10:12:02 AM PDT by Nachum

The awful launch week for the over-hyped, expected bestseller The Rogue: Searching for the Real Sarah Palin, by controversial author Joe McGinniss, just got worse. Much worse.

After a week of universally scathing pans from the reflexively anti-Palin establishment media, McGinniss now faces the fight of his literary life: the accusation that he seems to have knowingly submitted a book to his publisher, Crown/Random House, that was filled with unproved “tawdry gossip” and rumors that lacked “factual evidence.”

(Excerpt) Read more at biggovernment.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: breitbart; crown; email; gop; hoax; house; joemcginniss; likely; literary; mcginniss; obama; palin; perry; primaries; published; random; randomhouse
Time to sue.
1 posted on 09/22/2011 10:12:10 AM PDT by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Just read it. Very juicy! But Joe seems so, I dunno...professional. What gives?


2 posted on 09/22/2011 10:20:27 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

Sounds like she may have a good defamation lawsuit.

Especially if it is proven to be intentional.


3 posted on 09/22/2011 10:22:32 AM PDT by Col Frank Slade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

yes.

my wife and i were just reading this and she said the same.


4 posted on 09/22/2011 10:24:58 AM PDT by ken21 (ruling class dem + rino progressives -- destroying america for 150 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Wait, what? Respected journalist and honest-to-God-not-a-pedophile McGinniss just made everything up?

No way! Say it isn’t so, Joe!


5 posted on 09/22/2011 10:25:44 AM PDT by agere_contra ("Debt is the foundation of destruction" : Sarah Palin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Col Frank Slade

Needless to say, I have no read the book. But if the stuff in that letter ended up in the book, McGinness is in trouble. He admits that the stories hold no water and smack of BS.


6 posted on 09/22/2011 10:25:59 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Palin is a public figure and the laws are different for public figures in relationship to suing McGinnis and his publisher Crown-Random. If they can show “Absence of Malice” they will not be sued.

However, the email shows explicitly that Crown-Random published a sordid book based on rumors and presented it as fact. Their legal team did not perform “due diligence” in fact checking the book. It does not get much more malicious than that.

McGinnis and Crown Random’s bank accounts are going to take a serious hit in the near future.

7 posted on 09/22/2011 10:26:12 AM PDT by cpdiii (Deckhand, Roughneck, Mud Man, Geologist, Pilot, Pharmacist. THE CONSTITUTION IS WORTH DYING FOR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Follow the link...read the entire email!

Joe pretty much lays out in great detail how he has absolutely no proof of anything!

AMAZING!

If this email turns out to be real, Joe's done.

8 posted on 09/22/2011 10:28:28 AM PDT by Tex-Con-Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
filled with unproved “tawdry gossip” and rumors that lacked “factual evidence.”

Just to note -- the reason those phrases are marked with quotes is because they're McGinniss' own words from the email.

9 posted on 09/22/2011 10:28:28 AM PDT by kevkrom (This space for rent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

I love Andrew Breitbart.
I wish he would hurry up with Big Education.


10 posted on 09/22/2011 10:28:41 AM PDT by netmilsmom (Happiness is a choice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
McGinniss now faces the fight of his literary life: the accusation that he seems to have knowingly submitted a book to his publisher, Crown/Random House, that was filled with unproved “tawdry gossip” and rumors that lacked “factual evidence.”

How can he 'fight' the accusation? Joe McPenis DID knowingly submit a book to his publisher which was filled with unproved tawdry gossip and rumors that lacked factual evidence.

11 posted on 09/22/2011 10:29:07 AM PDT by WayneS (Don't Blame Me, I voted for Kodos!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

It appears the whole McGinniss book is nothing more than a recounting of the baseless accusations from that little group of wacko bloggers in Alaska who seemed to be in some sick kind of competition as to who could concoct the most outlandish smears to hang around Palin’s neck. Same ones who started the “Trig isn’t Sarah’s Son” insanity. I thought they had finally discredited themselves with the “impending federal indictment” and “impending divorce” stories from two years ago, which they’d successfully gotten the mainstream media to report, only to be wind up with egg on their faces.

Oh, and McGinniss is a sub-human cretin, unworthy of breathing American air.


12 posted on 09/22/2011 10:31:27 AM PDT by greene66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

After reading the article, the name Jesse Griffin sounded vaguely familiar. Turns out Jesse Griffin was a blogger on a liberal online sewer called “mudflats”, and was outed a few years back. A rabid Palin hater and defamer. Some freepers may recall the story.


13 posted on 09/22/2011 10:32:37 AM PDT by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tex-Con-Man

Says A LOT about a publishing house, no?

Blinded by greed in anticipated sales $$$$$, they should also be held accountable.


14 posted on 09/22/2011 10:33:36 AM PDT by Sir Napsalot (Pravda + Useful Idiots = CCCP; JournOList + Useful Idiots = DopeyChangey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Stunning admissions, if true. Punitive damages through the roof.

Go Sarah!


15 posted on 09/22/2011 10:38:21 AM PDT by reagandemocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Col Frank Slade
Sounds like she may have a good defamation lawsuit.

So you're saying that Sarah won't be running for Prez because she's about to own a publishing house?

16 posted on 09/22/2011 10:40:00 AM PDT by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

I am shocked! /s


17 posted on 09/22/2011 10:41:30 AM PDT by Chandalier (You say Obama, I say O-blame-o!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

I don’t think I said that.


18 posted on 09/22/2011 10:42:22 AM PDT by Col Frank Slade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
From Joe's email, near the end:

My book represents the last best chance to put the truth about Sarah in front of the American people in a documented, verifiable way.

It is abundantly clear to this observer that "the truth about Sarah" is already out there, and it is pretty tame, indeed. Not everybody lives to excess.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could just talk about how she might help America as a potential candidate and future president?

19 posted on 09/22/2011 10:44:00 AM PDT by RobinOfKingston (The instinct toward liberalism is located in the part of the brain called the rectal lobe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Col Frank Slade

Guess the tongue-in-cheek, wry humor doesn’t work on FR?


20 posted on 09/22/2011 10:44:06 AM PDT by T-Bird45 (It feels like the seventies, and it shouldn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

Heh. Sarah could simply relinquish her ownership interest to Jim Robinson before the inauguration.


21 posted on 09/22/2011 10:48:36 AM PDT by reagandemocrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

LOL must be sarcasm challenged today.

Sometimes hard to tell the difference.


22 posted on 09/22/2011 10:49:38 AM PDT by Col Frank Slade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

>>> Time to sue.

I (respectfully) disagree.

Time to let the indignant outrage from both Left and Right to subside a bit (I assume any decent Left who still exists, that is). Then make THE announcement.

In a way, she will be even more teflon-coated than before.


23 posted on 09/22/2011 10:52:15 AM PDT by Sir Napsalot (Pravda + Useful Idiots = CCCP; JournOList + Useful Idiots = DopeyChangey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Shouldn’t everyone who bought this book be able to demand their money back, perhaps with damages? heeheehee


24 posted on 09/22/2011 10:57:17 AM PDT by ryderann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

McGuinnis and the publishing house can fund her campaign. That ought to make their heads explode.


25 posted on 09/22/2011 11:04:15 AM PDT by Josephat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Sir Napsalot
Says A LOT about a publishing house, no?

Blinded by greed in anticipated sales $$$$$, they should also be held accountable.

Blinded by more than greed, I can assure you.

Political hatred was every bit as important.

26 posted on 09/22/2011 11:23:43 AM PDT by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance On Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

If Sarah does decide to run the left won’t have any mud left to sling at her. Besides that, they’ve gone so overboard in their hatred who would believe any more of their accusations?


27 posted on 09/22/2011 11:28:23 AM PDT by abigailsmybaby ("To understan' the livin', you gotta commune wit' da dead." Minerva)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Dear Ms. Sarah:

Please kindly sue the arse out of McGinniss and Crown-Random for $200 million dollars, which you have an excellent possilibility of winning given the proof of malicious slander.

Once winning the suit, please donate the award to the Republican party, and pro-life and Christian organizations.

Watch libbo nutjob heads explode.

thank you!

SARAH/MARCO 2012


28 posted on 09/22/2011 11:30:52 AM PDT by DecentAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

Hee hee... I got it


29 posted on 09/22/2011 11:35:54 AM PDT by Mr. K (Palin/Bachman 2012- unbeatable ticket~!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45

Did someone say “Palin House Publishing” ??


30 posted on 09/22/2011 11:38:14 AM PDT by biggredd1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: biggredd1

Bennett Cerf would not find this humorous...


31 posted on 09/22/2011 11:58:14 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
Bennett Cerf would not find this humorous...

Back in the sixties an MIT dorm had to be named Random Hall instead of Random House, due to Bennett Cerf's displeasure.

32 posted on 09/22/2011 1:12:30 PM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

It sounds professional until you remember that he published anyway.


33 posted on 09/22/2011 1:31:18 PM PDT by ICU812 (Oldtime Freeper, back from a long hiatus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ICU812

—It sounds professional until you remember that he published anyway.—

Oh absolutely. I’m just saying it “sounds” professional when taken alone. He shared legitimate concerns.

And then he published anyway. What a loser.


34 posted on 09/22/2011 1:35:51 PM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: cynwoody

Cerf published a book of jokes when he was at Random House...


35 posted on 09/22/2011 1:43:10 PM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Col Frank Slade
Sounds like she may have a good defamation lawsuit.

Especially if it is proven to be intentional.

******

I like Palin. I also believe that Obama is a fraud and a liar when it comes to telling us about his past and that he will lose come election day Nov. 2012.

But I believe that the book did severe damage to Palin's hope to run for President, because the ugly revelations in the book will help persuade Palin that she CANNOT run for President if she hopes to protect her family from savage criticism and ridicule.

1.Whatever ugly things people say about the book and the author, McGuinnis, Palin will never sue the author for defamation, because at the trial, the author will parade a list of witnesses who will back up much of the terrible things the author wrote in his book about Palin and her family.

2. One of the damaging details in the book is the claim that Palin had an affair with a professional basketball player. If Palin ever went to court and the basketball player testified that he did indeed have a one night stand with Palin and Palin was called to testify about the affair, Palin's dream of running for President would be over.

3. So, again, sad to say, I don't believe that Palin would ever dare sue the author in court for defamation, because she knows that a lot of details in the book are true, and such a trial would do terrible damage to her family.

4. In addition, if Palin took the author to court and lost, Palin knows that such a loss would do terrible damage to her reputation and credibility, and she knows that if she loses her credibility , she loses any chance to be elected President.

5. The author: He wrote a great book "Fatal Vision". He did lose a lawsuit to Jeffrey MacDonald, but Jeffrey MacDonald had trouble disapproving many of the details in the book, especially when MacDonald's own father-in-law provided the author with many of the details in the book and when MacDonald admitted that he allowed the author free access to follow him and his defense team around during the trial, a trial that showed that MacDonald did indeed murder his wife and two beautiful young girls.

6. So, as much as I like Palin, I believe that she won't run for President or sue the author for defamation, because she would not want to have her family members testify in court, which would cause terrible damage emotionally to those family members, especially after they were cross-examined by the author's lawyers.

36 posted on 09/22/2011 4:13:45 PM PDT by john mirse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: john mirse

I disagree a bit. I think Palin should run for president, and fight the smears to the very last breath. Otherwise, evil will triumph. And if the latter occurs, it just sets up an all-new template in which any potential GOP nominee is similarly targeted. The same scum will go after Rick Perry, digging up some seedy fags in Austin who’ll (falsely) make accusations towards him, and the media will make hay of all of it. There will be no stopping this kind of malicious evil.

If Palin does just give up, and bow out (understandable, of course, considering family), and vast populations of people wind up believing these grotesque lies, then again, evil will truly triumph, and I personally will see the country as rather unsalvageable. Or more pointedly, not even worth salvaging. I see the whole thing as a much bigger battle, going well beyond Palin and politics.


37 posted on 09/22/2011 4:41:10 PM PDT by greene66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: T-Bird45
Guess the tongue-in-cheek, wry humor doesn’t work on FR?

There is a number of people here who would readily believe that Swift really meant that we should eat the children of the poor.
38 posted on 09/22/2011 5:38:43 PM PDT by Peet (Cogito ergo dubito.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Peet

Common sense would tell us that the children of the rich would be much more nutritious, and therefore a better value per child eaten.


39 posted on 09/22/2011 9:43:22 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Lame and ill-informed post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Peet

P.S. Keeping in mind we are talking about the children in the US, the children of the poor probably have a much higher fat content as well, and would be high on cholesterol.


40 posted on 09/22/2011 9:46:18 PM PDT by UCANSEE2 (Lame and ill-informed post)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

*


41 posted on 09/22/2011 9:58:29 PM PDT by BunnySlippers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: john mirse
3. So, again, sad to say, I don't believe that Palin would ever dare sue the author in court for defamation, because she knows that a lot of details in the book are true, and such a trial would do terrible damage to her family.

How do you know this?
42 posted on 09/22/2011 10:06:56 PM PDT by PA Engineer (SP/XX12: Time to beat the swords of government tyranny into the plowshares of freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: UCANSEE2
Common sense would tell us that the children of the rich would be much more nutritious, and therefore a better value per child eaten.

Thanks for the morning laugh!
43 posted on 09/23/2011 4:45:38 AM PDT by Peet (Cogito ergo dubito.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson